I was practicing with Trappenjaad because everyone is AARing the Case Blue.

I am playing the Russians, Turn 2 it is already over.

I think I am seeing in Trappenjad, the Russians are in MUCH better condition than Case Blue.

All I have done to win by the second turn was to (1) Put my Fighters on No Intercept, (2) Launch the Fleet to Sevastapol and North towards Rostov (to bombard stuff like airplanes), (3) Move my forces one of two hexes behind the main front that is in contact with the Germans, (4) evacuate the Kharkov bulge, and (5) let everyone else sit on the Entrenchment level.

The Germans made a few attacks which I beat back and in the Crimea the Romanians evacuated that north tip and I rushed my Motorized Division up there (using Air Recon) to sever the Rail Supplies to the Germans in the Crimea.

My orders were to take kharkov in my trappenjaad scen. I managed barely to take it. Then the germans started to counter and eventually were about to cut off the 6th army so i had to pull back. And they are starting a slow push. I've held them up at the DON river and we've been at a stalemate since then for about 3 weeks.

Trappenjaad starts earlier when the soviet army is in better shape. Wonder why there is no 6th Army in case blue? because it was destroyed in the kharkov pocket. :)

That scenario starts in May, yes, before the historical second battle of Kharkov? You Sovs are *supposed* to be on the offensive then. Stalin wanted to take Kharkov back. He failed.

I'd say it's a bit early to declare that the AI sucks in that scenario. The Germans start on the defensive, but they should start turning the tide. If they don't, then we can worry about the AI.

What level AI are you playing against, by the way?

I'm playing the May 12 scenario against Easy Axis AI with a free set up since I wanted to have combat occur roughly as it would in PBEM. I didn't do well against the AI in the Crimea since I mostly evacuated it.

It's now almost August and the AI is putting up an interesting fight on the Dneipr line with KGs and security units while most of the axis forces are in pockets hundreds of kilometers to the east. Axis loses are about 300,000 and Russian loses are about 250,000 -- so it has been bloody and really not a badly fought battle for the AI even on Easy.

I'm playing the "Case Blue" scenario against the Soviet AI, on Normal, and it's putting up a great fight so far, as of turn 12. If I do something shaky, it punishes me. It did just make its first significant mistake, weakening its garrison at an objective, but I've made more mistakes than it has. E.g., last turn I forgot to use strategic movement to ship some guys to the front, and I forgot to place a reinforcement. The AI doesn't "forget" stuff like that.

Also, if you make completely a-historical decisions, such as saving the whole of 6th Army, you have now changed the balance of forces dramatically and you are in what-if land. Perhaps the Axis attack would have been unsuccessful if the Soviets had been better prepared? If the AI appreciates this and decides to hold, that's not necessarily a sign of a bad AI. Let's not forget that the real Case Blue led to Germany's greatest military defeat.

A really good Axis AI would make peace with Great Britain in 1940, sign a Pact with the USA, never invade the USSR and build farm implements instead of tanks from 1941 onwards!

I am in turn 6, game over.., really over. Crimea is mine except for a few stragglers. The rest of the front there is no movement. All my units are at least 100 entrenchment and same thing as before, when Axis attacks, I beat it back easily with my boatload of armor. If I were better at this, I would probably make a bold attack.

I think the Russian intergrity should be scaled back a LOT, to Case Blue levels. I also think there should be a major penalty for pulling the Russians out of the bulge. I have so much armor, it's just crazy.

In Case Blue, it would be super tough to win as Germans. In Trappenjaad.., no WAY the Russians can lose.., no way.

Presumably you're not allowing the Soviet 6th Army to be encircled in the Izium salient, then? As redmarkus says, historically the Soviets lost the 6th Army because they were ... unduly optimistic.

Have you taken Kharkov? Is it a Prestige requirement in that scenario to do so?

Also, what level of AI are you playing against? If you think the Russians need to be scaled back, you can achieve that by playing one of the higher difficulty levels. The "Normal" Soviet AI is giving me a tough fight in "Case Blue."

i do not agree. Against the AI you will eventually win all scenarios against a normal AI setting. In pbem games it remains to be seen, Olivier would have beaten me for sure. but i do not know what a german player can achieve against an equal soviet player.

Also, if you make completely a-historical decisions, such as saving the whole of 6th Army, you have now changed the balance of forces dramatically and you are in what-if land. Perhaps the Axis attack would have been unsuccessful if the Soviets had been better prepared? If the AI appreciates this and decides to hold, that's not necessarily a sign of a bad AI. Let's not forget that the real Case Blue led to Germany's greatest military defeat.

A really good Axis AI would make peace with Great Britain in 1940, sign a Pact with the USA, never invade the USSR and build farm implements instead of tanks from 1941 onwards!

By 1940 it is too late for Germany. A really good Axis AI would stop while Poland and Czechoslavakia still provided a buffer against the USSR.

After all in 1940, Germany did try to make peace with GB, but even if they had succeeded, by 1943 30,000 T34s would be ready to roll from inside Poland.

i do not agree. Against the AI you will eventually win all scenarios against a normal AI setting. In pbem games it remains to be seen, Olivier would have beaten me for sure. but i do not know what a german player can achieve against an equal soviet player.

Also, if you make completely a-historical decisions, such as saving the whole of 6th Army, you have now changed the balance of forces dramatically and you are in what-if land. Perhaps the Axis attack would have been unsuccessful if the Soviets had been better prepared? If the AI appreciates this and decides to hold, that's not necessarily a sign of a bad AI. Let's not forget that the real Case Blue led to Germany's greatest military defeat.

A really good Axis AI would make peace with Great Britain in 1940, sign a Pact with the USA, never invade the USSR and build farm implements instead of tanks from 1941 onwards!

By 1940 it is too late for Germany. A really good Axis AI would stop while Poland and Czechoslavakia still provided a buffer against the USSR.

After all in 1940, Germany did try to make peace with GB, but even if they had succeeded, by 1943 30,000 T34s would be ready to roll from inside Poland.

Well, yes, if you buy into the theory that Stalin was only biding his time before attacking Germany, with the forward posture of the Soviet army cited as supporting evidence.

The contrary view (which I find more compelling) is that Stalin was terrified of war with Germany and would have done almost anything to avoid it. The forward posture of his troops merely reflected conventional wisdom that attack was the best form of defence in the event of a war started by Germany.

Furthermore, an attack by the Soviet Union would have met a German army fighting on a single front and fully rested and equipped since it's highly unlikely that Hitler wouldn't have appreciated the threat. The Soviets meanwhile would have had no lend lease to depend on and no allied bombing campaign to diminish Axis production and logistics. There is a strong possibility that the Axis powers would have defeated the USSR in Eastern Germany/Poland. Also, let's not underestimate the effect of having been invaded in '41 on the morale and spirit of the Soviet soldier. How would he have fought during a war of aggression?

The other big what-if is whether Japan would have launched its attack in Asia if the western allies were not engaged in Europe. With peace in the Pacific, the potential for Japan to attack the USSR from the east, given a defeat of the latter in Poland, certainly needs to be taken into account.

Let's not forget also that Communism was considered an even greater menace than Fascism by many western leaders. How the west would have responded to a Soviet move into neutral Poland is anyone's guess. It's entirely within the bounds of possibility that the western allies would have assisted Nazi Germany in those circumstances, regarding Hitler as the eastern bulwark against the Soviet horde.

Also, if you make completely a-historical decisions, such as saving the whole of 6th Army, you have now changed the balance of forces dramatically and you are in what-if land. Perhaps the Axis attack would have been unsuccessful if the Soviets had been better prepared? If the AI appreciates this and decides to hold, that's not necessarily a sign of a bad AI. Let's not forget that the real Case Blue led to Germany's greatest military defeat.

A really good Axis AI would make peace with Great Britain in 1940, sign a Pact with the USA, never invade the USSR and build farm implements instead of tanks from 1941 onwards!

By 1940 it is too late for Germany. A really good Axis AI would stop while Poland and Czechoslavakia still provided a buffer against the USSR.

After all in 1940, Germany did try to make peace with GB, but even if they had succeeded, by 1943 30,000 T34s would be ready to roll from inside Poland.

Well, yes, if you buy into the theory that Stalin was only biding his time before attacking Germany, with the forward posture of the Soviet army cited as supporting evidence.

The contrary view (which I find more compelling) is that Stalin was terrified of war with Germany and would have done almost anything to avoid it. The forward posture of his troops merely reflected conventional wisdom that attack was the best form of defence in the event of a war started by Germany.

Furthermore, an attack by the Soviet Union would have met a German army fighting on a single front and fully rested and equipped since it's highly unlikely that Hitler wouldn't have appreciated the threat. The Soviets meanwhile would have had no lend lease to depend on and no allied bombing campaign to diminish Axis production and logistics. There is a strong possibility that the Axis powers would have defeated the USSR in Eastern Germany/Poland. Also, let's not underestimate the effect of having been invaded in '41 on the morale and spirit of the Soviet soldier. How would he have fought during a war of aggression?

The other big what-if is whether Japan would have launched its attack in Asia if the western allies were not engaged in Europe. With peace in the Pacific, the potential for Japan to attack the USSR from the east, given a defeat of the latter in Poland, certainly needs to be taken into account.

Let's not forget also that Communism was considered an even greater menace than Fascism by many western leaders. How the west would have responded to a Soviet move into neutral Poland is anyone's guess. It's entirely within the bounds of possibility that the western allies would have assisted Nazi Germany in those circumstances, regarding Hitler as the eastern bulwark against the Soviet horde.

The bulwark idea would work before Germany and Russia split Poland, after that, the West ceased to find the Germans anything other than dangerously opportunistic especially when it came to dealing with Russia. Which is why 1940 is too late. The bulwark against Russia was supposed to be Poland and Czechoslavakia. Also by 1940, the German economy was already heading steadily down hill. See The Wages of Destruction: